Beckman v. Butte-Silver Bow County’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 6 district · 38 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[t]he proper use of [safety] precautions requires special knowledge and, when not followed or properly applied, may result in instantaneous death to the workers.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dunkle v. Middleburg Municipal Authority · Marlys Bear Medicine Delores Iron Shirt George Kicking Woman v. United States of America

2. “The distinction described in the Restatement between “ordinary” or standard and “special” precautions depends on whether the precaution is meant to counter a common or a peculiar risk. Employers are not hable for every tort committed by a subcontractor who is engaged in an inherently dangerous or hazardous activity. Rather, an employer is only vicariously liable for those torts which arise from the unreasonable risks caused by engaging in that activity. [With regard to trenching operations, t]hese precautions may include sloping the banks of a trench, mechanically shoring a trench bank, or using a trench box. Such precautions, although arguably standard with regard to the risk posed, are special in that they are designed to protect workers from the unreasonable, extraordinary, and unusual risks associated with trenching operations.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dunkle v. Middleburg Municipal Authority

3. “If a contractor is employed to transport giant logs over the highway, the contractor’s employer is not liable for torts caused by the contractor driving in excess of the speed limit. Speeding is not an unreasonable risk particular to transporting logs, but is an ordinary form of negligence which is usual in the community and the prevention of which requires ordinary or standard precautions. However, an employer will be vicariously liable for the contractor’s failure to take special precautions to anchor the logs to the contractor’s truck. This is because transporting giant logs creates an uncommon hazard that the logs will become disengaged, a hazard not ordinarily encountered in the community which calls for particular precautions to prevent its occurrence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Paull v. Park County